Feature Request: Option to merge instruments when creating parts
Example 1: Piano with 2 voices.
In the master score, each voice is arranged in its own instrument. Then, create a part with piano and both voices.
(a) When voices are in 'dialogue' (i.e. voice 1 sings while voice 2 rests, and vice versa), the bars can be selected and 'merged' so they appear on one staff line, with a stave text indicating which voice sings at which part. See example on p.1 of attached pdf '6 Who Are You, Sir?'.
(b) When voices are in unison, the bars can be merged with a stave text indicating both voices are singing together. See example in systems 3-4 on p.2 of attached pdf '10 Finale'.
In both cases, the staves separate when the voices sing in divisi.
Example 2: creating a shared part for two instruments (ex. cello/contrabass).
(c) Cello and contrabass often play in unison with occasional divisi. The two parts can be written separately in the master score, and one part created for 'Cello/Bass'. The parts can be merged into one staff, so that Cello is on 'Voice 1' and Bass is on 'Voice 2' (but stemless, so voice 2 is essentially invisible). For playback/mp3 export, the 'Cello' sound is used for voice 1, and the 'Bass' sound is used for voice 2.
When parts play in divisi, the option can be applied to split the voices on separate staves. This needn't always be the case (the two voices can simply both be visible on one staff), but sometimes--for example, if the cello has a trill on a note while the bass doesn't, or if the cello is playing tremolo while bass is arco--the division of staves is necessary to avoid the parts clashing or becoming confusing. When this happens, the unison measures in the same system also divide automatically. (Thus, if a break is applied before the divisi, the unison measures revert to one staff, and unison measures after the divisi on the same system divide on the two staves.)
For example of parts divided on two staves and then unison on one staff, see attached pdf 'CB Cello-Bass' p. 10.
For example of cello with trill/bass without, loc. cit., system 3, bar (thus, the parts can't be on one staff or it would appear the bass should trill as well).
For example of cello in tremolo with bass in arco, loc. cit., p. 11, system 7, rehearsal mark H (thus, they can't be on one staff or it would look like the bass should also tremolo).
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| 6 Who Are You Sir.pdf | 668.07 KB |
| 10 Finale.pdf | 162.33 KB |
| CB Cello-Bass.pdf | 3.23 MB |
Comments
I'm not totally following from the PDF's - an actual score would make it easier. But I suspect what you describe is doable by making the master score actually combine the parts that might ever need to be combined, and then have a "part" that you use as the print score that generates separate staves for those voices.
In reply to I'm not totally following… by Marc Sabatella
If it helps, I'll attach the project I've been working on. In this score:
-- I've manually combined the cello/bass instruments in the 'Cello/Bass' tab, but (a) the two voices only play as cello sounds, and I've had to incorporate frequent stave texts to indicate div./unis./octaves/etc.
-- In a piece like #10 in the score (search: '10x' for the first bar of that song), all three vocal lines are in unison, so it would save a lot of space if I could merge them together in one line.
As for the technical side:
Maybe when creating a part, while adding instruments to the part, next to each instrument is a [+] icon to add (merge) another instrument into that instrument. Thus, for example, when creating a cello/bass part, I add the cello instrument in the usual way, and then instead of adding the bass as usual, I click the bass instrument and the [+] icon next to the cello instrument to merge the parts. Alternately, the [+] icon could be added next to each voice in the expanded view of the instrument, so, after adding the cello, I would select the bass instrument, then expand the cello, and click the [+] next to 'Voice 2' to add the bass part as 'Voice 2' in the cello line (in that part only, of course).
It would then be additionally helpful to have 'Merge/split instruments' as an option when working within a part, in order to fine-tune the display. Thus, for example, after creating a part with merged cello/bass instruments (and bass in voice 2 of the cello), I could select measures 7-9 and choose 'Split instruments' to have the two instruments display on separate staves. The appropriate stave texts would be added at the start of the split to indicate divisi, and at the end of the split to indicate unison.
Similarly, when working with voices in dialogue (when I don't want to merge the entire voice-instruments together), I create the part with Voice A and Voice B as separate instruments, and then within the part, I can select measures 7-15 and choose 'Merge instruments', which adds the bottom/second instrument, as voice 2, to the top/first instrument. The appropriate stave texts would be inserted above the merged parts to indicate which bars/notes/rests belong to which instrument.
From another angle of the technical side, it would thus be useful to be able to apply different sound fonts to each voice. The default, of course, would be the same sound font as voice 1, but when merging instruments, the sound font of the merged instrument would be used for voice 2, thus preserving the playback and mp3 export sounds.
In reply to If it helps, I'll attach the… by tjdickinson
Thanks for the score, that makes it easier to follow. There are a lot of different cases being discussed here, and it's hard to keep straight, so let's focus for now on cellos and basses, since you mention that here.
Can you explain exactly what you'd like to see in the score versus the part(s)?
To me, the normal thing to possible want is to combine the parts onto one staff for the score to save space, but still have separate parts. This is supported directly. But it kind of sounds like for some reason you want the opposite - two staves in the score, but only one part? Is there a reason for this, or am I misunderstanding something?
In reply to Thanks for the score, that… by Marc Sabatella
You're most welcome! (I'd misunderstood what you meant by 'score'--I thought you just wanted sheet music examples, not the actual MuseScore file :) )
Indeed, you're exactly right--what I'm trying to do is have two separate parts in the master score (to make it easier for the conductor to see each part, and to have the option to create individual cello/bass parts), but to be able to create a combined cello/bass part (as well).
Basically, in the project I'm working on, the inclusion of one instrument in the master score doesn't change a whole lot in terms of layout. I can basically fit one, sometimes two, systems per (a4) page, and that's just how it's gotta be, I suppose. Merging the cello/bass lines in the master score doesn't save much space. But in the parts, having the cello/bass combined (as opposed to having two staves for cello/bass in one part) saves heaps of space and reduces (almost eliminates) page turning within a song.
Thinking in terms of composition (though I am admittedly not a composer), I imagine it would be simpler to work with composing bass and cello lines as separate instruments (better visibility) rather than try to compose them together in one staff.
In reply to You're most welcome! (I'd… by tjdickinson
In that case, I'd do it as I suggested: the actual main score would have the parts combined - that's necessary for this to work. But then you would generate a "conductors score" from that. This would contain all other staves as is, but for the cello/bass you'd add that instrument twice, once just for voice 1, once for voice 2. Then you could also generate either separate cello and bass parts, or just the combined one.
It seems a little backwards perhaps, but as far as I know, what you are describing wanting is quite unusual. Normally it's the other way around, as I said - scores combine parts to save space, parts are separate. Do you have some setting in mind where you really think the cellos and basses will prefer to read off the same part rather than each having their own? I guess if it is a single player doubling on both instruments, switching between them as appropriate? If so, it would seem that much more appropriate to me for the conductor to be aware that is what the player is facing, by seeing the parts combined in his score.
In reply to In that case, I'd do it as I… by Marc Sabatella
FWIW, I learned long ago that as far as notation software goes, the score you hand to players and the score you use for playback are two different things. One score can't do it all.
As a conductor, I never liked condensed scores. And conductors are all different. Some really watch the score, some glance at it from time to time. And some, after study, never look at it again.
I'm not in a situation where saving space means anything. I know that may not be true for everyone.